Legal Weed, Illegal People: How Governments Turn Freedom Into a Subscription Service
If you ever needed proof that drug policy was never about “health” or “safety,” look at where we are right now: in a world where a corporation can legally sell you THC in a branded gummy, but a poor person with a joint can still end up in a cage. Where billion‑dollar cannabis companies ring the New York Stock Exchange bell, while people who built those markets in the underground economy are still serving time. Where governments brag about “harm reduction” in glossy reports while quietly expanding police budgets and surveillance.
The War on Drugs Never Ended — It Rebranded
Politicians love to say “the war on drugs has failed.” That’s cute. It didn’t fail. It did exactly what it was designed to do: control, cage, and criminalize the “wrong” people while consolidating power and protecting profit.
Let’s stop pretending this was ever about public health. In the United States, the Controlled Substances Act of 1970 dumped cannabis, LSD, MDMA, psilocybin, and more into Schedule I — officially defined as having “no accepted medical use” and a “high potential for abuse.” Meanwhile, alcohol — a drug directly responsible for millions of deaths globally every year — is cheerfully legal, taxed, and advertised during sporting events.
This isn’t science. It’s politics wrapped in lab-coat theater. Nixon’s own domestic policy chief, John Ehrlichman, admitted years later that the administration’s strategy was to criminalize Black people and anti-war activists by going after heroin and cannabis. Prohibition wasn’t a mistake; it was a weapon.
Follow the Money: Who Wins From Prohibition?
If prohibition “doesn’t work,” why does it keep getting funded? Because it works extremely well for the people who designed it.
Prisons, police unions, surveillance tech vendors, border militarization contractors, and now rehab profiteers — they all depend on drugs staying illegal enough to justify endless budgets and infrastructure. At the same time, pharmaceutical companies have used prohibition to crush competition from plant medicines and “recreational” compounds that could replace some of their products.
Concrete example: as of the early 2010s, nearly half of all federal prisoners in the United States were serving time for drug offenses, overwhelmingly nonviolent and often simple possession or low-level distribution. That’s not “keeping communities safe.” That’s feeding a carceral machine that treats human beings as inventory.
Another: the U.S. has spent over a trillion dollars on the war on drugs since the 1970s. What did it buy? Global black markets, record overdose deaths, militarized policing, and a thriving prison industry. The only things it didn’t deliver were its stated goals: less use, less harm, less crime.
Legalization for Some, Criminalization for Others
The current era of “legal weed” is not the victory story some people pretend it is. It’s a case study in how the state transforms your rights into products you have to buy back from licensed corporations.
In Canada, cannabis was legalized nationwide in 2018. Sounds great. But instead of simply decriminalizing possession and cultivation and expunging old records, the government built a tightly controlled, corporatized system. Big players with capital got licenses; small-scale growers and legacy dealers — the very people who took the risks before legalization — were shut out or criminalized if they kept operating outside the new regime.
The same pattern repeats across U.S. states:
- People are still serving long sentences for cannabis in states where legal dispensaries now operate openly.
- License fees and regulatory requirements are structured so that only heavily capitalized outfits can compete.
- “Social equity” programs are, at best, cosmetic — a brochure-friendly fig leaf on a fundamentally unequal system.
That’s not justice. That’s monetized mercy — freedom as a subscription model, sold back to the public at a markup.
Prohibition Kills — The Drugs Usually Don’t
Let’s be blunt: most drug deaths are policy deaths. Not pharmacology deaths.
When you force drugs into an unregulated underground market, you do three things:
- Destroy quality control and dosage transparency.
- Force people to use in unsafe conditions (alone, rushed, in hiding).
- Make seeking help dangerous because of police, stigma, and criminal records.
We then have the audacity to call the resulting deaths “overdoses,” as if the molecule teleported into someone’s bloodstream against their will. What we actually have is poisoning — often from fentanyl-adulterated supply, unknown potency, or panic-driven rushed consumption.
Look at North America’s overdose crisis. Fentanyl contamination exploded after governments clamped down on pharmaceutical opioids while refusing to create a legal, regulated non-medical supply. The black market adapted faster than policy — as it always does — and people paid for that political cowardice with their lives.
Meanwhile, countries that treat drugs as a health and rights issue instead of a crime problem show what’s actually possible.
Portugal: Decriminalization Isn’t a Fantasy, It’s Data
In 2001, Portugal decriminalized possession of all drugs for personal use. Not “legalized” — but crucially, they stopped putting people in cages for carrying substances. Possession cases are handled by “dissuasion commissions” focused on health and social support, not punishment.
The result?
- Overdose deaths plummeted compared to other EU countries.
- HIV transmission among people who use drugs dropped sharply.
- Problematic use stabilized or declined; society did not collapse into hedonistic chaos.
In other words: when you stop policing people’s veins and start supporting their lives, things get better. Amazing what happens when you treat humans like humans.
Selective Legality: When Corporations Do It, It’s “Industry”
Prohibitionists love to claim that drug policy is about “sending the right message.” They’re right in one sense: the message is crystal clear.
The message is: your body is not yours. Your consciousness is not yours. Your ability to alter your mood or experience is a privilege granted or denied by the state, and increasingly, by corporations operating under state license.
When Pfizer or a psychedelic startup develops an MDMA- or psilocybin-based medicine, it’s “innovation.” When an underground chemist synthesizes MDMA for a rave, it’s a felony with potential decades-long sentences. The molecule is the same. Only the logo changes.
A perfect example of this hypocrisy is how governments are handling psychedelics. Research clearly shows promise for psilocybin and MDMA in treating PTSD, depression, and other conditions. So regulators are slowly tiptoeing toward medicalization — but strictly in clinical, heavily monetized formats that lock access into medical-industrial gatekeeping.
You don’t get to go on a legally recognized trip to heal or explore unless:
- You have the right diagnosis.
- You can afford the protocol.
- You go through licensed professionals operating within rigid systems.
Adults using the same substances outside that framework? Still criminals in many jurisdictions. The state isn’t against drugs; it’s against unlicensed freedom.
“Harm Reduction” Without Rights Is Just Managed Prohibition
A lot of governments have figured out they can score progressive points by saying the words “harm reduction” while keeping the core prohibition structure intact. They’ll hand out naloxone but not legal heroin. They’ll fund supervised consumption sites but keep criminal penalties for possession. They’ll run ad campaigns about “reducing stigma” while maintaining laws that guarantee it.
That’s not harm reduction. That’s risk management for the war on drugs itself.
Real harm reduction means:
- Safe supply — regulated, known-dose options for people who use opioids and other drugs.
- Decriminalization of possession and small-scale supply, so people aren’t forced into unsafe patterns.
- Legal frameworks that treat drug use as a normal part of human life, not an aberration to be punished or “managed.”
Anything less is basically: “We’re going to keep pushing you into a dangerous underground, but we’ll toss you a life jacket now and then so the death rate doesn’t look too embarrassing.”
What Ending Prohibition Actually Means
Ending prohibition isn’t about running naked through the streets throwing MDMA tablets like confetti. It’s about recognizing that:
- Adult humans own their bodies and minds.
- The safest world is one with regulated access, honest education, and non-punitive support.
- The state has no legitimate claim to control subjective experience.
A sane drug policy would look something like this:
1. Full Decriminalization of Use and Possession
No one should be arrested, charged, or have a criminal record for possessing or consuming any drug. Period. That includes so-called “hard drugs.” Criminal records destroy lives far more reliably than any substance.
2. Legal, Regulated Supply
Different drugs, different models. But across the board:
- Known potency, clear labeling, and quality standards.
- Age restrictions, just like alcohol and tobacco.
- Non-predatory pricing and availability, avoiding the “luxury cannabis boutique” model that prices out the people most at risk.
Heroin? Prescribed or available via supervised access for those who want it, as already done successfully in places like Switzerland. Stimulants? Regulated retail with clear info, safer formulations, and support systems. Psychedelics? Legal for both therapeutic and personal exploration, with optional facilitation — not mandatory gatekeeping.
3. Mass Expungement and Release
Anyone sitting in a cell for a drug offense that is no longer illegal should be released. Records should be wiped. If a corporation can make money selling the substance, nobody should be imprisoned for the same thing.
4. Redirect Funding From Cops to Care
The billions currently poured into drug enforcement should go to:
- Voluntary treatment and peer-led support for those who want it.
- Housing, income support, and mental health services — the real drivers of chaotic use.
- Community-based harm reduction programs designed and run by people who actually use drugs.
You want to see “drug problems” drop? Fund people, not punishment.
“But People Will Abuse It!” — They Already Do
The favorite prohibitionist scare tactic is: “If we legalize everything, everyone will get addicted!” This ignores two reality checks:
- Plenty of drugs are already legal (alcohol, caffeine, many pharmaceuticals), and society hasn’t imploded — though it has absolutely normalized some very harmful patterns.
- Prohibition has never stopped use. It’s only made it more unsafe.
You cannot legislate away the human desire to alter consciousness. People have been doing it for thousands of years — for pleasure, for healing, for ritual, for escape. The question is not “drugs or no drugs?” The question is “chaotic, criminalized, unsafe drug markets, or transparent, regulated, rights-based access?”
Addiction and problematic use are real, but they are social and economic issues far more than pharmacological ones. People with stable housing, meaningful work, connection, and dignity are less likely to spiral into destructive patterns. No SWAT team has ever fixed loneliness, poverty, or trauma.
Bodily Autonomy Means All of It — Not Just What’s Politically Fashionable
We cannot talk about bodily autonomy only in the context of reproduction, gender, or medical consent, and then pretend it evaporates the moment someone decides to take a psychedelic or smoke meth. Your body and mind do not become state property because you swallowed the “wrong” molecule.
If we accept that informed adults have the right to refuse medical treatment, undergo risky procedures, drink alcohol, gamble, and consume junk food, then telling them they cannot consume a plant, powder, or pill is nothing more than moral authoritarianism dressed up as “public health.”
Ending prohibition is not some fringe libertarian fantasy. It’s a necessary step in any society that claims to respect freedom, evidence, and human dignity.
The Real Risk: Leaving Power Where It Is
Let’s be honest: the biggest danger right now is not that we’ll move “too fast” toward legalization. It’s that we’ll accept a fake version of reform — tightly controlled, corporate-friendly, and selectively enforced — while the core logic of prohibition stays intact.
We’re already seeing it with cannabis and psychedelics: carefully fenced-in legality for the well-behaved and well-funded, continued criminalization for everyone else. That is not liberation. That’s the war on drugs with a prettier logo.
We don’t need more timid half-measures, pilot projects, or 20-year studies to prove the obvious. We have over a century of evidence: prohibition fuels violence, contaminates supply, wastes money, and destroys lives — all while failing on its own terms.
The radical position is no longer the one saying “end prohibition.” The radical position is the one insisting we keep doubling down on an experiment that has been a moral, scientific, and humanitarian disaster.
It’s time to stop negotiating with a failed paradigm. Adults have the right to own their bodies, their brains, and their choices — without asking for permission from governments that have proven, over and over, that they care more about control than about our lives.
—
Tags: drug policy, harm reduction, legalization, antiprohibit, opinion
